I disagree with your tone. The status quo use the terms "liberal" and "conservative" to keep the "people"fighting among themselves instead of uniting for freedom.

The media is controlled by five different men, not by liberals or conservatives. Mr. Sulzberger, Mr. Murdoch, Mr. Zell, Mr. Buffett et al could give a flying F%$# what a liberal or a conservative is. They just use the names as necessary to get what they want.

If the media through their actions hates someone, then that is whom you vote for.

Why?

Because the media DOES NOT have your best interests at heart. The people that are belittled and marginalized by the media are the ones to support.

This eliminates:

Ms. Clinton

Mr. Obama

Mr. McCain

They don't like Romney but, are very careful about hating him too much. They are afraid of creating a martyr.

By the way results from the Maine GOP indicate Dr. Paul is second with 35% of the delegates to the state convention. This new release was from a German website. But remember, there is NO media conspiracy. The German people need to know how Dr. Paul did in the Maine Caucus..the heck with the people in Maine.

This leaves us with the Doctor....and a good one at that.

by tom storey (3 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 58 comments) on Monday, Feb 4, 2008 at 5:50:35 PM

  (0+)

Nice pickup on the Romney media bias thing. With Ron Paul its obvious, but self-financing candidates who actually want to stop the supply of union-busting illegal immigrants scare the establishment as well.

by John Bowery (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 5, 2008 at 2:19:46 PM

  (0+)

It could also be theorized that one of the reasons that the troops (particularly the ones outside CONUS) haven't been subjected to the massive media bias against Paul and are more likely to have done their electoral "due diligence".  Many of them actually believe in their oath to the Constitution, many of them like average Americans are really dissatisfied with the lack of real leadership on the things that matter. Its always nice to serve under a Comander in Chief with ethics and values.

On the one hand it is easy to attribute their support as being based on Paul's "out of foreign entanglements" stance, but on the other that is presuming that they are not supporting him for the same reasons that many of his other supporters are. Presuming that they are one issue voters(although a big issue to them) somewhat lessens them to an "abstract" rather than real people with real concerns.

Wouldn't it be interesting to poll our overseas troops as a sort of control group as compared to the nation as a whole who have been spoonfed media bias for the last year.

I'm not complaining about your article, just making a point ; )

by Chad Underdonk (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 19 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 5, 2008 at 5:27:49 AM

  (0+)

Great article!

This is one of those stories in the election that isn't being told simply because Ron Paul is the beneficiary. Had anyone but RP been the one receiving most of the money, you can bet this would be all over the news.

by sunnyjim (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 5, 2008 at 7:36:02 AM

  (0+)

Didn't you know? The troops all think John McCain would be the best Commander-in Chief? I know its true because he said so, and he's a "straight-talking war hero".

by John Bowery (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 20 comments) on Tuesday, Feb 5, 2008 at 2:15:47 PM

  (0+)